As ‘open’ and supposedly inclusive informal learning settings that participants visit out of interest and passion, there has been hope that makerspaces will democratize technology and challenge traditional gender patterns in engineering education. Passion for technology has, however, also been shown to be deeply intertwined with the masculinization of engineering. This article explores how this tension manifests among engineering students and other makers at an ‘open’ voluntaristically-organized technology makerspace located at the campus of a Swedish university of technology. It draws on a post-structural understanding of gender and Sara Ahmed’s queer-phenomenological conceptualization of emotions as ‘orienting devices’. Based on ethnographic fieldwork and interviews with makers, we show how passion for technology is articulated as a particularly absorbing emotion that underpins a playful approach to technology and a framing of makers as single-minded and asocial. We demonstrate how passion for technology thereby becomes a homosocial ‘glue’ that makes technology ‘sticky’ for only a select group of techno-passionate men. We conclude that this undermines the potential for ‘making’ to democratize technology and puts into question the degree to which interest-driven, voluntaristic and ‘authentic’ settings for engaging with technology can contribute to pluralizing engineering.

作为参与者出于兴趣和热情而访问的“开放”且据称具有包容性的非正式学习环境，人们希望创客空间将使技术民主化并挑战工程教育中的传统性别模式。然而，对技术的热情也被证明与工程学的男性化密切相关。本文探讨了这种紧张关系如何在位于瑞典理工大学校园的“开放”自愿组织的技术创客空间中在工程专业学生和其他创客中体现出来。它借鉴了对性别的后结构性理解和萨拉·艾哈迈德将情感作为“定向装置”的酷儿现象学概念化。基于民族志实地考察和对制造商的采访，我们展示了对技术的热情是如何表达为一种特别引人入胜的情感，这种情感支撑着一种有趣的技术方法，以及如何将创客塑造为一心一意和不合群的人。我们展示了对技术的热情如何成为同质社会的“粘合剂”，使技术仅对选定的一群对技术充满热情的男性具有“粘性”。我们的结论是，这削弱了“创造”使技术民主化的潜力，并对利益驱动、自愿和“真实”的技术环境对多元化工程做出贡献的程度提出了质疑。我们展示了对技术的热情如何成为同质社会的“粘合剂”，使技术仅对选定的技术热情男性群体具有“粘性”。我们的结论是，这削弱了“创造”使技术民主化的潜力，并对利益驱动、自愿和“真实”的技术环境对多元化工程做出贡献的程度提出了质疑。我们展示了对技术的热情如何成为同质社会的“粘合剂”，使技术仅对选定的一群对技术充满热情的男性具有“粘性”。我们的结论是，这削弱了“创造”使技术民主化的潜力，并对利益驱动、自愿和“真实”的技术环境对多元化工程做出贡献的程度提出了质疑。